TMI Blog2001 (11) TMI 79X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... Y.K. Sabharwal, J.]. - The appellant imported Polypropylene under the Value Based Advance Licensing Scheme and availed of duty free clearance of the goods claiming exemption under Notification No. 203/92, dated 19th May, 1992. According to the department, the appellant was not entitled to the benefit of duty free import as it had violated condition no. (V) (a) of the said notification. That condition was that the export obligation should have been discharged by exporting goods manufactured in India in respect of which no input stage credit is obtained under Rule 56A or 57A of the Central Excise Rules, 1944. 2.The department by show cause notice dated 3rd September, 1997 alleged that the appellant had suppressed the fact that it had availe ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... e period between the date of exports and the date of reversal has to be calculated and deposited by the exporters before 31st January, 1997. It further provides that where credit has already been reversed, the exporters shall deposit the interest amount calculated in the manner prescribed before 31st January, 1997. 5.The Commissioner found that the appellant did not fulfil the conditions of the Amnesty Scheme. The requirement of the scheme not having been fulfilled and the appellant had violated the terms of the exemption Notification No. 203/92 by availing modvat credit contrary thereto, the show cause notice was confirmed imposing custom duty and also the interest and the penalty. 6.The appeal filed by the appellant before the Customs ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... and regard must be had to the clear meaning of the words and that the matter should be governed only by the language of the notification, i.e. by the plain terms of the exemption. Learned counsel for the appellant, however, relied upon order dated 21st January, 1997 and 22nd January, 1997 passed by this Court in M/s. Raj Exports v. National Aluminium Co. Ors. [SLP (C) No. 8755/1986] wherein while disposing of the special leave petitions and connected petitions, it was directed that the petitioners in those cases shall be entitled to release of the goods imported without payment of the customs duty. Counsel contends that the said order had reversed the decision of the High Court of Orissa in Raj Exports v. National Aluminium Co. Ltd. [199 ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X ..... y be maintained chapterwise. MODVAT credit is not available if the final products are exempt or chargeable to nil rate of duty. However, where a manufacturer produces along with dutiable final products, final products which would be exempt from duty by a notification (e.g. an end use notification) and in respect of which it is not reasonably possible to segregate the inputs, the manufacturer may be allowed to take credit of duty paid on all inputs used in the manufacturer of the final products, provided that credit of duty paid on the inputs in such exempted final products." Para 8 of the judgment relied upon by the learned counsel reads thus : This circular deals"8. with a case where the manufacturer produces dutiable final products ..... X X X X Extracts X X X X X X X X Extracts X X X X
|
